MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advances in neurostimulation for movement disorders

2000· review· en· W1486887963 on OpenAlexaff
Robert E. Gross, Andrés M. Lozano

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurological Research · 2000
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurostimulationMovement disordersPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineMovement (music)Deep brain stimulationPsychologyNeuroscienceStimulationParkinson's diseasePhysicsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In just 12 years since its introduction, deep brain stimulation (DBS) has become well established as a safe and effective therapy in the treatment of medically refractory movement disorders. Ventralis intermedius (Vim) DBS has virtually replaced thalamotomy in the routine clinical treatment of essential tremor, affording relief to thousands of patients who previously would not have undergone surgery, and there is increasing usage of Vim DBS in other tremors of intention (e.g., multiple sclerosis). Subthalamic nucleus (STN) and globus pallidus internus (GPi) DBS have revolutionized the treatment of advanced stage Parkinson's disease, improving all cardinal disease features and increasing 'on' time without dyskinesias. Finally, DBS of various sub-cortical structures is being developed and tested in other less prevalent movement disorders such as dystonia. Future developments in this rapidly advancing area will no doubt include widening indications for this relatively safe surgical procedure, elucidation of the mechanisms of action of electrical stimulation, and technological advancements improving effectiveness and convenience.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.007

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.221
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations144
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurological ResearchSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207